Está en la página 1de 8

Journal of Prisoners on Prisons Vol. 4 No.

2 (1993)

Copyright © Journal of Prisoners on Prisons (1993) All Rights Reserved. Cite this article as the Formatted Online Version (2006)

“Breaking Men's Minds: Behavior Control and Human Experimentation at the Federal Prison in Marion”
- Eddie Griffin ***
Having spent a total of two and a half years in this experimental behavior laboratory-type fortress, I have witnessed atrocities that are on the same par as Pinochet's concentration camps in Chile and that of Hitler's Auschwitz. (Victor Bono, Marion Captive)

After receiving an injury in the prison machine shop, where I narrowly missed losing a finger, I was patched up, administered a painkiller, and then sent back to work. Soon afterwards, there was almost a repeat of the same accident, so I decided to quit my work in the machine shop. I was immediately locked up in segregation for refusing to work, and for eight months, I continuously refused to work until I was guaranteed a job change. But the administration declared that they would use me wherever they needed me. Prisoners do not control their institution. My insistence about the work hazard led to my being shipped to Marion, no doubt to have my obstinate behavior corrected. A BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION LABORATORY Upon first glance, Marion differed radically in its appearance from what one would believe from the horrid myths. The ominous sword of Damocles over the prison system appeared to be no threat. But the human eye can be deceived by what is contracted on the phenomenal level. A vague but bleak sensation invades a man's being when he passes through the grill doors into the prison’s interior. Each electronically controlled grill seems to alienate him more and more from his freedom - even the hope of freedom. A sense of finality, of being buried alive, is raised to the supra-level of his consciousness. He tries to suppress it, but the clanging of each door leaves an indelible imprint on his psyche. This is the first evidence that Marion is more than a physical star-chamber. It is a modem ‘behavior modification laboratory’. Behavior modification at Marion consists of a manifold of four techniques: 1) Dr. Edgar H. Schein's brainwashing methodology; 2) Skinnerian operant conditioning; 3) Dr. Levinson's sensory deprivation design (i.e. Control Unit); and 4) chemotherapy and drug therapy. And, as I will point out, the use of these techniques, the way they are disguised behind pseudonyms and under the philosophical rhetoric of correction, and even their modus operandi, violate the Nuremburg Code, the United Nations' Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare policy on human experimentation, and the First, Sixth and Eighth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

Throughout the state and federal prison systems, there are circulating stories and hearsay about the Marion, Illinois Federal Prison. These tales weave their way through the grapevine and, over a period of time and distance, become mystique and legendary, especially among young prisoners making their unfortunate debut into the system. For example, in 1972 at Terre Haute Federal Prison, it was not uncommon to hear young prisoners unfold myths about an 'underground prison' called Marion, where those who entered would never see the sun again until their release. Others would claim the Control Unit at Marion was underground, and whoever was placed there would spend the rest of their sentence in it. No one really knew for sure because, up until then, no prisoner returned to Terre Haute from Marion. Real or unreal, a dread grew up around the myths. Whatever existed behind the walls of Marion generated apprehension of a legal form of assassination. Prison officials at other institutions cultivate and exploit these fears by threatening to send certain resistive prisoners to Marion. A man is told to conform to the institution, or he will be sent to Marion to have his behavior 'corrected.' The thought of being 'corrected' by unknown means has a chilling effect on the senses, and it tends to sterilize any resistance which might exist in prison populations. Evidently, Marion was a control mechanism for the entire prison system a penal cesspool where other institutions discarded their waste. I was one of the so-called 'incorrigibles' who had come into conflict with Terre Haute officials, and I was threatened with being sent to Marion.


Journal of Prisoners on Prisons Vol. 4 No. 2 (1993)

The constructs of the prison are somewhat peculiar. Some not-so-outstanding features do not make the least economical sense, and are often totally out of physiological order. But these features, when viewed from a psychological angle, begin to take on new meaning. For example, the prison is minced into small sections and subsections, divided by a system of electronic and mechanical grills further reinforced by a number of strategically locked steel doors. Conceivably, the population can be sectioned off quickly in times of uprising. But even for the sake of security, the prison is laced with too many doors. Every few feet a prisoner is confronted by one. So he must await permission to enter or exit at almost every stop. A man becomes peeved. But this is augmented by the constant clanging that bombards his brain so many times a day until his nervous system becomes knotted. The persistent reverberation tends to resurrect and reinforce the same sensation, the same bleak feeling that originally introduced the individual into the Marion environment. It is no coincidence. This system is designed with conscious intent. Every evening the 'control movement' starts. The loud speakers, which are scattered around the prison resonate the signal: ‘The movement is on. You have ten minutes to make your move’. The interior grill doors are opened, but the latitude and limits of a man's mobility are sharply defined, narrowly constricted. His motion, the fluidity of his life, is compressed between time locks. There is a sense of urgency to do what prisoners usually do - nothing. It is just a matter of time before the last remnants of a prisoner's illusion become obliterated. At the end of the ten-minute limit, the speakers blare out: ‘The movement is over. Clear the corridor’. The proceedings stop. Twenty minutes later the routine is repeated, and so on, until a man's psyche becomes conditioned to the movement/non-movement regimentation, and his nerves jingle with the rhythmic orchestration of steel clanging steel. In prisoners’ words, it is ‘part of the program’ - part of the systematic process of reinforcing the unconditional fact of a prisoner's existence: that he has no control over the regulation and orientation of his own being. In behavioral psychology, this condition is called 'learned helplessness' -a derivative of Skinnerian operant conditioning (commonly called 'learning techniques'). In essence, a prisoner is taught to be helpless, dependent on his overseer. He is taught

to accept without question the overseer's power to control him. This rebels against human consciousness, so some prisoners seek means of resistance. Others try to circumnavigate the omnipotent force via escape. But the omnipotent is also omnipresent. Nothing escapes Marion’s elaborate network of ‘eyes’. Between television monitors, prisoner spies, collaborators, and prison officials, every crevice of the prison is overlaid by a constant watch. Front-line officers specially trained in the cold, calculated art of observation, watch prisoners’ movements with a particular meticulousness, scrutinizing little details in behavior patterns, then recording them in the Log Book. This aid provides the staff with a means to manipulate certain individuals’ behavior. It is feasible to calculate a prisoner's level of sensitivity from the information, so his vulnerability can be tested with a degree of precision. Some behavior modification experts call these tests ‘stress assessment.’ Prisoners call it harassment. In some cases, selected prisoners are singled out for one or several of these ‘differential treatment’ tactics. A prisoner could have his mail turned back or ‘accidentally’ mutilated. He could become the object of regular searches, or even his visitors could be strip searched. These and more tactics are consistent with those propagated by one Dr. Edgar H. Schein. A HISTORY OF THIS BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION LABORATORY At a Washington, DC conference in 1962 organized for the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) by the National Institutes of Mental Health, Schein presented his ideas on brainwashing. Addressing the topic of ‘Man against Man’: Brainwashing, he stated:
In order to produce marked changes of behavior and/or attitude, it is necessary to weaken, undermine or remove the supports to the old patterns of behavior and the old attitudes. Because most of these supports are the face to-face confirmation of present behavior and attitudes, which are provided by those with whom close emotional ties exist, it is often necessary to break those emotional ties. This can be done either by removing the individual physically and preventing any communication with those whom he cares about, or by proving to him that those whom he respects aren't worthy of it and, indeed, should be actively mistrusted (quoted in Chorover 1979).


Journal of Prisoners on Prisons Vol. 4 No. 2 (1993)

Dr. Schein then provided the group with a list of specific examples:
●Physical removal of prisoners from areas sufficiently isolated to effectively break or seriously weaken close emotional ties. ●Segregation of all natural leaders. ●Use of cooperative prisoners as leaders. ●Prohibition of group activities not in line with brainwashing objectives. ●Spying on prisoners and reporting back private material. ●Tricking men into written statements which are then showed to others. ●Exploitation of opportunists and informers. ●Convincing prisoners that they can trust no one. ●Treating those who are willing to collaborate in far more lenient ways than those who are not. ●Punishing those who show uncooperative attitudes. ●Systematic withholding of mail. ●Preventing contact with anyone non-sympathetic to the method of treatment and regimen of the captive populace. ●Disorganization of all group standards among prisoners. ●Building a group conviction among the prisoners that they have been abandoned by and totally isolated from their social order. ●Undermining of all emotional supports. ●Preventing prisoners from writing home or to friends in the community regarding the conditions of their confinement. ●Making available and permitting access to only those publications and books that contain materials which are neutral to or supportive of the desired new attitudes. . ●Placing individuals into new and ambiguous situations for which the standards are kept deliberately unclear and then putting pressure on him to conform to what is desired in order to win favor and a reprieve from the pressure. ●Placing individuals whose willpower has been severely weakened or eroded into a living situation with several others who are more advanced in their

thought-reform whose job it is to further undermine the individual's emotional supports. ●Using techniques of character invalidation, ie., humiliations, revilement, shouting, to induce feelings of guilt, fear, and suggestibility; coupled with sleeplessness, an exacting prison regimen and periodic interrogational interviews. ●Meeting all insincere attempts to comply with cellmates' pressures with renewed hostility. ●Renewed pointing out to the prisoner by cell mates of where he has in the past, or is in the present, not been living up to his own standards or values. ●Rewarding of submission and subserviency to the attitudes encompassing the brainwashing objective with a lifting of pressure and acceptance as a human being. ●Providing social and emotional supports which reinforce the new attitudes (ibid.).

And, of course, as noted in the introduction to this edition of the Journal, following Schein's address, then-director of the BOP, James V. Bennett, encouraged the administrators and wardens throughout the federal prison system to put Schein's techniques into practice. 'We can manipulate our environment and culture. We can perhaps undertake some of the techniques Dr. Schein discussed.... There's a lot of research to do. Do it as individuals. Do it as groups and let us know the results' (ibid.). That was in 1962. Since then the results have been compiled and evaluated many times over, and all but one of Schein's suggested techniques have been left intact at Marion - along with the addition of several new features. A BOP policy statement (October 31,1967) sanctions, after a test period, experimentation on prisoners when the benefit from the experiments are 'clear in terms of the mission and collateral objectives of the Bureau of Prisons' and for 'the advancement of knowledge.' In other words, prisoners are expected to feel inspired at the thought of 'advancing knowledge' to benefit science and corrections. But what prisoner knows that s/he is aiding the development of behavior modification techniques to be used in controlling and manipulating not only other prisoners, but also segments of the public? Besides other things, s/he is denied knowledge of what s/he is involved in - or rather forced into. The truth of behavior modification is that it is applied to


Journal of Prisoners on Prisons Vol. 4 No. 2 (1993)

prisoners secretly, and sometimes remotely (via manipulation of the environment). EXPERIMENTATION IN ACTION At Marion, these techniques are applied for punitive purposes, and only one subsection of the prison population is allowed any relief. First, a man's emotional and family ties are broken by removing him to the remote area of southern Illinois and by enforcing a rule whereby he can not correspond with community people within a fifty-mile radius. Sometimes the rule slackens, but when the prisoner's correspondence expresses ideological perspectives, it is enforced more strictly. Families of prisoners who move into the area are often discriminated against and harassed by government agencies. Visitors complain of being intimidated by prison officials, especially when the visits are inter-racial three occasions, for example, a man's wife, who had traveled from Puerto Rico, was stripped and searched. This caused great concern among prisoners, because it could happen to anyone of their wives, mothers, or children. Another tactic to break a prisoner down is to punish him by removing family and friends from his visiting list1 or by placing him on restrictive visits. These types of visits are conducted in an isolated, partitioned booth by telephone. Such restrictions often discourage families from visiting, especially when they have to travel long distances. Officially, close family ties are encouraged; practically, they are being severed. And more often than not, a man's family is looked upon and treated with the same disdain reserved for a 'criminal'. Another method of separating prisoners from friends and outside supporters is the twofaced campaign waged by the prison administration. On the one side, prisoners are told they have been totally rejected by society, and that even those who ‘pretend’ to be interested in them are ‘only using prisoners for their own selfish benefit.’ By this a prisoner is supposed to believe that he was never a part of a community or of society in general, that his ties among the people were never legitimate, and that their interest in him is a fraud. On the other side, a brutish, bestial, and ‘sociopathic’ image of prisoners is presented to the public. The horror image further alienates the people from the captive, and it sometimes causes a family to fear their own loved ones. This further isolates the prisoner and makes him more dependent on the

prison authorities. But discernment of this sophisticated system may be far beyond a prisoner's imagination, or even his comprehension. It is impossible for him to retain his sense of being, his human worth, and dignity having been reduced in the eyesight of humanity to the level of an amoeba and placed under a microscope. He cannot understand why he feels the strange sensation of being watched; why it seems that 'eyes' follow him around everywhere. He fears his sanity is in jeopardy, that paranoia is taking hold of him. It shows: the tension in his face, the wide-eyed apprehensive stares, and spastic body movements. Among the general prison population, paranoia tends to spread like wildfire- from man to man. Everyone knows that the paranoid person is a walking state of danger. His mood throws everyone else out of equilibrium. The small world cannot contain the imbalance. A general alarm is sent out in hopes that someone can reach the individual before the disequilibrium ends with disaster. Sometimes the alarm is successful, sometimes not. In any case, the induced state of paranoia is a primary cause of the violence, which has occurred throughout Marion's history. The pervasive ‘eyes’ at Marion are not without the complement of ‘ears.’ Besides officers eavesdropping and the inside spies trying to collect enough intelligence to make parole, there are also devices out of view. Loudspeakers, for example, are also receivers, capable of picking up loose conversations in the hallways, cell blocks, and mess hall. Recently a strange device, that someone called a parabolic mike, was found. It is hard to figure out exactly how many more such devices are scattered around the prison, embedded in the wall or situated behind cells. The administration is known for collecting an enormous amount of information on prisoners, some of which could only be gathered from such eavesdropping methods. Sometimes a prisoner is confronted with the information in order to arouse suspicion about the people he has talked with. At other times the information is kept secret among officials, and traps are set. Most sacred of all is a person's ideas. There is a standing rule among the prisoners: Never let the enemy know what you are thinking. At Marion, a man is labeled by his ideas, and his ‘differential treatment’ is plotted accordingly. Thus, if a man's expressed ideas are at variance with the ideas and perception of the prison


Journal of Prisoners on Prisons Vol. 4 No. 2 (1993)

administration, behavior modification is used on him to reconcile the difference. What life boils down to is an essay of psychological warfare. An unsuspecting, or a prisoner unable to adjust and readjust psychologically and develop adequate defense mechanisms, can be taken off stride and wind up as another one of Marion's statistics. Prison officials and employees come well prepared, well trained, and well aware of the fact that a war is being waged behind the walls. BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION AND THE MISUSE OF THERAPY TECHNIQUES There is a small elite group in the prison population that is looked upon by the administration with great favor, because the group shares the same basic ideals with the administration. The group's members see the prison authority as a ‘parent.’ They think of themselves as ‘residents’ rather than as prisoners or captives - because to change the word is to change the reality. And they believe the program in which they are being trained will make them ‘qualified therapeutic technicians’ and help them secure a change in residency. At Marion, this program is called Asklepieion - which literally means ‘nothing’. The prisoners call the group ‘groders’ or groder’s gorillas, named after the psychologist who implemented Dr. Schein's brainwashing program. The ‘groders’ live in a special cellblock that, by prison standards, is plush. They are allowed luxuries and privileges which regular prisoners can not receive. However, they are convinced that they 'earn' these things because they are trying to do something to ‘better themselves’. Generally, they look on other convicts with contempt. When confronted with evidence that they are a brainwash group, they reject the proof and accuse other prisoners of being envious But the reality speaks for itself. The program employs a number of noted therapeutic techniques; e.g., transactional analysis, Synanon attack therapy, psychodrama, primal therapy, and encounter group marathon sensitivity sessions. The administration's favorite is transactional analysis (TA). Essentially, TA propagates the theory that people communicate on three different levels: parent, child, and adult. These become character roles. It is up to the corresponding party to figure out which role the

first party is playing, then communicate with the person on the proper counter-part level. What this technique actually does is create an artificial dichotomy between people, each straining to fit into the proper character role. Thus, communication becomes artificial, stilted, and utterly meaningless in its content. Everyone sounds like a pseudo-intellectual. Ultimately, it propagates the idea that the authorities always fit the role of ‘parent’ and the prisoners must submit to the role of a ‘child’. Although some ‘groders’ pretend this practice is a fakeout on ‘the man,’ it still is a real social practice. Changing the words to describe it does not change the reality. Other techniques include Dr. Schein's ‘character invalidation’. These techniques are incorporated under the auspices of ‘game sessions’ (Synanon attack therapy) and ‘marathons’ (encounter group sensitivity sessions). In ‘game sessions’ members of the group accuse a person of playing games, not being truthful with the group, lying, and so forth, or the person is accused of some misdeed or shortcoming. Before he is allowed a chance to explain (which is considered as only more lying), he is relentlessly barraged by dirty-name calling until he confesses or ‘owns up’ to his shortcomings. He is then accused of making the group go through a lot of trouble in having to pry the truth out of him. 50, for this crime, he is forced to apologize. ‘Marathons’ are all-night versions of literally the same, except that they include local community people who come into the prison to be 'trained' in the techniques. After so many hours of being verbally attacked and denied sleep, a person ‘owns up’ to anything and accepts everything he is told. After being humiliated, he is encouraged to cry. The group then shows its compassion by hugging him and telling him that they love him. These techniques exploit the basic weaknesses in human (aggregative) nature, especially those weaknesses produced by an alienating society, i.e., the need to be loved, cared about, accepted by other people, and the need to be free. In turn, they are transmuted into ‘submission and subserviency’, the type of behavior conducive to the prison officials' goal of control and manipulation. The ‘groders’ will not resist or complain. Nor will they go on a strike to seek redress of prisoners’ grievances. They are


Journal of Prisoners on Prisons Vol. 4 No. 2 (1993)

alienated from their environment, and emotional inter-dependency welds and insulates them into a crippled cohesion (of the weak bearing the weak). They are not permitted to discuss these techniques outside the group, because one of the preconditions for admittance is a bond to secrecy. Yet almost anyone can spot a ‘groder’ because the light has gone out of his eyes. He literally wears the look of humiliation. Some years ago, the prison population wanted to do the ‘groders’ bodily harm because they allowed themselves to be used as guinea pigs, and because the techniques they helped to develop would be used on other prisoners and people in the outside world. In their lust for freedom, ‘groders’ would help to sell out an entire generation. Today, they are generally looked upon as mental enemies. So prisoners just leave them alone. Meanwhile, the brainwashing programs are still finding their way into communities in the outside world - under a number of pseudonyms other than Asklepieion. And the ‘groders’ still have hopes of joining these programs when they are sufficiently spread. They will become 'therapeutic technicians.' This is what Dr. Groder laid out in his ‘master plan’, utilizing prisoners as couriers of the techniques into the community. It is also what former warder Ralph Aron meant when he testified at the 1975 Bono v. Saxbe trial that ‘the purpose of the Marion control unit is to control revolutionary attitudes in the prison system and in the society at large.’ What the ‘groders’ fail to realize is that, even as ‘therapists,’ they will remain under observation long after their release from prison under what is euphemistically called 'post-release follow-through.' And what Dr. Groder fails to realize is that by camouflaging Dr. Schein's techniques under pseudonyms, whereby prisoners who volunteer for the program cannot recognize its real meaning and objectives, extensive violations of the Nuremburg Code have taken and are taking place. Even the implication of freedom as inducement for volunteers is considered a means of coercion by the Code's standards. The first principle in the Code proclaims:
[V]oluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit,

duress, over-reaching or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision ... . Before an acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject, there should be made known to him the nature, duration and purpose of the experiment.

There is much that is not explained or accounted for at Marion. Prisoners are left to discover it all on their own, via studying the prison and the prison system's history. In light of most of the discoveries one makes when learning this history, it should come as no surprise that some aspects at Marion are at variance with the Nuremburg Code. CHEMOTHERAPY: THE MISUSE OF DRUGS Chemotherapy is administered four times daily at Marion. The loudspeaker announces: 'Control medication in the hospital... pill line'. Valium, librium, thorazine and other ‘chemical billy-clubs’ are handed out like gumdrops. Sometimes the drugs mysteriously make their way into the food. For example, the strange month of December, 1974, recorded five unrelated, inexplicable stabbings. During the same time, eight prisoners suffered from hallucinations in the 'hole' and had to be treated (with thorazine injections). Drugs are often prescribed for minor ailments and are often suggested to prisoners as a panacea for all the psychological ill-effects of incarceration. Some drugs such as prolixin make prisoners want to commit suicide. Some attempt it; some succeed.2 THE END OF THE LINE: THE LONGTERM CONTROL UNIT Segregation is the punitive aspect of the behavior modification program. It is euphemistically referred to as ‘aversive conditioning’. In short, prisoners are conditioned to avoid solitary confinement, and to avoid it requires some degree of conformity and cooperation. But the ‘hole’ remains open for what prison authorities and Dr. Schein call ‘natural leaders’. These prisoners can be pulled from population on ‘investigation’ and held in solitary confinement until the so-called investigation is over. During the whole ordeal, the prisoner is not told what the inquiry is about unless he is finally charged with an infraction of the rules. If the Marion authorities think that the


Journal of Prisoners on Prisons Vol. 4 No. 2 (1993)

behavior modification techniques will eventually work on the prisoner, he is sent to short-term segregation. If not, they use the last legal weapon in the federal prison system: the long-term control unit. The long-term control unit is the ‘end of the line’ in the federal prison system. Since there is no place lower in all of society, it is the end of the line for society also. Just as the threat of imprisonment controls society, so is Marion the control mechanism for the prison system; ultimately, the long-term control unit controls Marion. Prisoners in the unit can feel the heaviness of this burden, knowing that it is a long way back to the top. Usually a prisoner does not know specifically why he has been sent to the control unit, other than that his ideological beliefs or his personal attitude toward prison authority is somehow ‘wrong’. And he usually does not know how long he will be in the control unit. A prisoner is told he is being placed on thirty-day observation, and that he has the right to appeal the decision if he wishes. Until recently, most prisoners simply waived the appeal because they were given the impression that they would be getting out soon. One particular prisoner was told by the Control Unit Committee that he would be getting out of the control unit after the observation period because they ‘needed the room’. Later he was given an indefinite period in the unit - that is the case with most prisoners. In the control unit, a prisoner only does two things: recreate and shower. Only one range of men (18 out of 72) is allowed to work. Although everyone recognizes that the work is exploitative, it is generally considered a privilege. The rest of the control unit prisoners spend 23 1/2 hours a day locked in their cells. According to what state the man's mind is in, he may read or write. He sees the Control Unit Committee for about thirty seconds once a month to receive a decision on his ‘adjustment rating’. He may see a caseworker to get papers notarized, the counselor to get an administrative remedy (complaint) form, and a phone call authorization (on a 'maybe' basis). He may see the educational supervisor for books. Other than that, he deteriorates. The cell itself contains a flat steel slab jutting from the wall. Overlaying the slab is a one-inch piece of foam wrapped in coarse plastic. This is supposed to be a bed. Yet it cuts

so deeply into the body when one lays on it, that the body literally reeks with pain. After a few days, you are totally numb. Feelings become indistinct, emotions unpredictable. The monotony makes thoughts hard to separate and capsulate. The eyes grow weary of the scene, and shadows appear around the periphery, causing sudden reflexive action. Essentially, the content of a man’s mind is the only means to defend his sanity. Besides these methods of torture (and they are torture), there is also extreme cold conditioning in the winter, and a lack of ventilation in the summer. Hot and cold water manipulation is carried out in the showers. Shock waves are administered to the brain when guards bang a rubber mallet against the steel bars. Then there is outright brutality, usually in the form of beatings. The suicide rate in the Control Unit is five times the rate in the general population at Marion. At the root of the Control Unit's behavior modification program, though, is indefinite confinement. This is perhaps the most difficult aspect of the Control Unit to communicate to the public. Yet a testament to this policy was a man named Hiller ‘Red’ Hayes. After thirteen years in solitary confinement (nearly six in the control unit), he became the ‘boogie man’ of the prison system - the living/ dying example of what can happen to any prisoner. The more he deteriorated in his own skeleton, the more prisoners could expect to wane in his likeness. He died in the unit in August, 1977. In essence, the Unit is a Death Row for the living. And the silent implications of behavior modification speak their sharpest and clearest ultimatum: conform or die! In several instances [the control unit] has been used to silence prison critics. It has been used to silence religious leaders. It has been used to silence economic and philosophical dissidents. (Judge James Foreman, US District Court, St. Louis) REFERENCES
Chorover, S.L. 1979. From Genesis to Genocide: The Meaning of Human Nature and the Power of Behavior Control. Cambridge: MIT Press


Journal of Prisoners on Prisons Vol. 4 No. 2 (1993)


As an example, the co-editor of this edition of the Journal has had family and friends removed from his visiting list at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility (which follows the Marion model) without any notice, so that family and friends have been denied entrance into the prison after traveling hundreds of miles to visit. On each occasion that this has occurred, the prison officials claimed that they had no idea how it could have happened. Certain names just jumped off the visiting list and scampered their way out of the doublelocked filing cabinet all by themselves. Complaints to Warden Arthur Tate (who spent his last paid vacation touring Marion, lllinois, and found it 'highly impressive') fell on deaf ears. He refused to even acknowledge receipt of the complaints, thereby fully endorsing such illegal treatment as legitimate led]. It is of more than passing interest that the US Supreme Court ruled on February 27, 1990 that prison officials may administer any kind of powerful, mind-altering drugs they wish to any prisoner whose behavior they feel is undesirable. The decision as to whom these powerful, mind-altering drugs may be administered is left to the absolute discretion of prison officials, and no outside review is allowed, so long as the prison psychiatrist (whose employer is the warden) states that it is in the prisoner's best interest led].